South Puget Sound Agricultural Producer Needs Assessment

Stephen G. Bramwell Sarah Moorehead Aslan Meade WSU Extension, Thurston Co Thurston Conservation District Thurston EDC Agriculture Faculty Farm Outreach Specialist Rural Development [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Rebecca Sero Sheila Gray Miles Nowlin Washington State Univ. WSU Extension, Lewis Co WSU Extension Evaluation Specialist Extension Director Research Technician [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Abstract This agricultural producer needs assessment aims to increase awareness of issues facing the agricultural community in the south Puget Sound region. It also aims to spur community-wide action based on these results, while providing specific guidance for the development of agricultural research and education programming at WSU Thurston County Extension. This project was supported by partnerships with the Thurston Economic Development Council, Thurston Conservation District, and WSU Lewis County Extension, with financial sponsorship by the Port of Olympia.

0 | P a g e

Table of Contents

Table of Contents 1 Introduction 2 Methods 3 Executive summary 8 Results Summaries 10 Capital, equipment and infrastructure 10 Consumer education 12 Farm inputs 13 Labor 14 Land 15 Marketing 17 Pest pressure 19 Regulatory 20 Research, education, networking, info resources 22 Water Management 23 Resources and solutions 24 Conclusion 32

Appendix I. Existing regional needs assessments 33 Acknowledgements 38

Introduction

A needs assessment is undertaken to guide development of research and education plans for County Extension programs. It can also yield results useful to community members, agencies and organizations interested in supporting farmers, growing the agricultural economy, maintaining natural resources, and building community.

In 2016, the Thurston County Washington State University Extension agriculture program initiated an effort to assess the needs of agricultural producers in the South Puget Sound region of western Washington. In order to document farmer needs for internal (Extension) use, as well as for a South Sound region audience, several partner organizations engaged in and supported this effort. The Thurston Economic Development Council, Thurston Conservation District, and WSU Extension Lewis County partnered on data collection.

The goals of this needs assessment were to:

 Provide WSU Extension with producer input to help guide planning and evaluation of agriculture research and education programs  Provide regional organizations with producer input to guide economic development, agricultural resource conservation, and other community development and education programming  Complete a robust documentation of agricultural producer needs available for use by other individuals, agencies and organizations in the south Puget Sound region Figure 1. Change in farm numbers in Thurston County Documenting needs of producers in Thurston County is also important given trends that challenge the viability of agriculture in the region. These include long-term trends in farmland loss (6,500 acres since 2000; 90,000 since 1950; an aging farm population (average of 59 in Thurston County); development pressure (126,000 new residents by 2040) pushing up farm start-up costs such as for land; the continued loss of large farms1 and contiguous farmland (Figs 1, 2); new food safety and conservation regulations; and corporate entry into local and sustainable food markets that shifts conditions for high-value farm-direct sales through farmers markets, farm stands and box subscription programs (CSAs).

With over $122 million in agricultural sales (4th among Puget Sound counties; top ten statewide in livestock sales), an Figure 2. Farm numbers by value of sales increasing number of farmers, and steady increase (4%) in sales between the most recent U.S. agriculture census cycles, Thurston County enjoys significant economic and community benefits from agricultural activities. Addressing the needs identified in this assessment will help to sustain the viability of agriculture in the region along with the economic, social and cultural benefits of a vibrant farm economy.

1 Large farms can compliment small and medium-sized farms in several ways, anchoring farm support businesses such as feed stores, welding services, slaughter facilities; provide resource exchanges such as manure; enable equipment access; and if multi-generational often provide repository of local farm knowledge and skills 2 | P a g e

In the course of utilizing this resource, please reference the directly transcribed producer comments where greater detail is needed: http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/. Attempts were made to summarize needs accurately and indicate how many individuals shared high-priority needs; however, detail is inevitably lost transcribing producer comments into summaries.

Methods

The needs assessment approach utilized in this study consisted of three parts: (1) pre-assessment, (2) assessment, and (3) post-assessment.

Part I. Pre-Assessment The goals of the pre-assessment were to review available information concerning agricultural producer needs in the region, and to determine whether additional research was necessary. Results of this assessment are summarized in Appendix 1 (Pre-existing Regional Farm Needs Assessments), and include summaries of four reports. Each resource contributes to an understanding of agricultural producer needs, but none provide a systematic, region-wide assessment inclusive of all producer types. The goal of the current work was to document producer needs across the south Puget Sound region, and across producer types including forestry, nursery crops, grain, fruit and vegetable, meat, dairy, forage, and to a more limited extent gardener-homesteader. With the goal of a widely inclusive documentation of needs directly from producers, an assessment (Part II) was undertaken from June 2016 through February 2017.

Part II. Assessment The WSU Thurston County Extension Agricultural Needs Assessment utilized input from producers to assess needs. The authors collected comments during five producer meetings and seventeen one-on-one interviews. Four of the input sessions were focused on producers in different regions around Thurston County including Rochester, Rainier, East Olympia, and West Olympia. A final input session involved members of the South Sound chapter of the Washington Farm Forest Association. In total ninety-two individuals were surveyed including eighty-three farmers representing seventy-two farms, and nine gardener-homesteaders.

Assessment Methodology: Listening Sessions. A method modified from Angima and Etuk was utilized to document producer needs utilizing an interactive, small-group format known as a nominal group technique. This approach allows small groups with a brief prompt to rapidly generate structured feedback in a way that minimizes ‘group think’ while eliciting individual responses which then stimulates additional group input.

At the outset of listening sessions, prior to separating into small break-out groups, attendees were asked to comment privately (using blank “current situation” forms) on two topic areas: “what is” and “what should be”.

3 | P a g e

What is the current situation(s) in your business with respect to the following prompt categories: production, marketing, land, education and training, regulations, and other

What should be the solution/s in reference to your “what is” comments?

“What is” comments and “what should be” responses were sequentially recorded on two side-by-side sets of flip charts. Each “what is/what should be” pair was counted as one comment. A total 235 comments were collected. At the completion of the small-group exercise, group findings were compiled and shared, with brief discussion. At the end of each input session, participants were given three colored dots and asked to place them next to the comments that represented their highest priorities. No attempt was made to identify solutions during this exercise as the focus was needs documentation within a limited timeframe.

Transcribing producer comments from flip charts

Assessment Methodology: One-On-One Sessions. One-on-one sessions were conducted in person or over the phone with 17 producers. Participants were asked to provide input on the same topics as above and were asked to provide as little or as much input as wanted.

Data Analysis. Qualitative data analysis of listening session results was conducted in cooperation with Rebecca Sero, an Extension Evaluation Specialist with Washington State University. Two sorting methodologies were utilized: open coding and axial coding. Open coding was used to break down data into headings and subheadings. Headings were established on the basis of major themes in producer comments. Comments were assigned to these (ten) categories: marketing, land, regulations, research/education/networking/information resources (R&E), farm inputs, water resource management, consumer education, pest pressure and labor. The total number of comments was calculated in each category, and comments could only be assigned to one category.

Summary statements were then developed, and assigned to different subheadings that captured the primary messages in the comments. For example, responses regarding ‘Water Rights” issues were summarized and grouped together as a subheading under the heading of “Water Management”. The bulk of this report regarding producer needs is included in these “Results Summaries” from page 10-23.

A second approach, axial coding, was also utilized to analyze how producer needs relate to each other. A “need” often exists in relation to others. For example, a need for assistance with water rights transfers among farmers related to regulations governing resource management, access to information resources and training, and irrigation efficiency. To document these relationships, comments were assigned to any category to which they related, non-exclusive. In this 4 | P a g e assessment, comments pertaining to “Land” were made fifty-one times, and simultaneously referenced other categories fifty-seven times. The result, fifty-seven, is one measure of how significant a need is: if a needs category doesn’t related, or cross over to other categories, with much frequency, it likely is not as significant as other needs. In this report, this measure is a “cross-reference” count, and captures the number of times comments in one heading also references needs topics assigned to other headings.

Results Summaries. The Results Summaries (p. 10-23) are syntheses of all comments offered during input sessions and one-on-one sessions. Overlapping themes were synthesized and summarized into a reader friendly format. The summary includes fact boxes supporting each category which reference the following counts:

1) The number of comments in each category, sorted by the predominant theme (open coding) 2) The number of priority marks in each category (colored dots) 3) The “cross-reference count”, or, the number of times a given category was referenced among all categories (axial coding) 4) The ranking of each category by number of comments 5) The ranking of each category by number of priority marks 6) The ranking of each category by the cross-reference count Below the counts are sets of priority mark themes, short summaries of comments that attendees felt strongly enough about to post colored dots next to.

Ground-truthing Needs Ranking by Thurston County Agriculture Committee. Needs assessment comments were sorted and ranked in this study with the intention of identifying priority work areas for local Extension research and education efforts, and to provide regional groups, agencies and organizations with a practical assessment of priority producer needs. To provide a check to the ranking approach described above, needs priorities were ground-truthed across the ten-member Thurston County Agriculture Committee, consisting of six farmer and four non-farmer members. Needs assessment results were presented to the committee in a series of ten slides, consisting of the ten needs categories organized alphabetically. Following the presentation committee members were asked to identify the top three needs areas (Table 1).

Table 1. Needs areas ranking by comments (#), cross references (#), and Ag Committee panel Comments per need area References to other needs areas Panel prioritization R&E (120) R&E (163) Regulations (6) Regulations (66) Regulations (106) Land (6) Capital, equipment, infrastructure Capital, equipment, infrastructure R&E (4) (63) (83) Capital, equipment, infrastructure (4) Markets (58) Markets (65) Markets (4) Land (51) Land (57) Water (2) Consumer education (34) Consumer education (57) Labor (2) Water (24) Water (42) Farm inputs (1) Labor (20) Pests (24) Pests (0) Farm inputs (20) Labor (23) Consumer education (0) Pests (18) Farm inputs (21)

In discussion following the exercise, the panel proposed several modifications to the ranking and grouping of needs areas. The panel proposed that R&E, though receiving many comments and referenced many times in association with producer needs, could be considered a ‘tool’ to address producer needs, and could be applied to all needs areas to good benefit. For this reason the panel concluded it should not be a specific subject matter needs area, while remaining significant as the most called-for mode of support by producers. 5 | P a g e

Second, the panel resonated with a combined “productive resources” category as opposed to two separate “land” and “water” categories. The panel felt very strongly about producer comments regarding access to land and water (productive resources), suggesting these were the cornerstone of supporting producers.

Thirdly, the panel felt that “marketing” and “capital, equipment and infrastructure” were more coherent as a combined “market access” category. Subsequently, the study authors noted that the former addressed social barriers to market access, while the latter addressed physical barriers to market access. A combined market access category was therefore developed.

Fourthly, the panel agreed with producer comments regarding the need for adjustments to the regulatory landscape to facilitate the viability of long-term agriculture in the region. This category ranked within the panels top three priorities.

Synthesis of Priority Ranking Approaches. As a result, the Thurston County Agriculture Committee identified regulations, productive resources, and market access as the “big three” needs areas among producers in the region. The study authors felt the panel’s reorganization:

1. related subject matter-specific needs (like access to land) to opportunities to address them through R&E (research, education, information resources and networking), and 2. largely agreed with the with quantitative ranking while offering a slight re-prioritization of results as interpreted by a knowledgeable group of individuals embedded in the farming community

Part III. Post Assessment – Solutions Implementation

Post-assessment within a Needs Assessment consists of design and implementation of solutions. Broadly, individual organizations, agencies and other entities in the south Sound region utilizing results in this report will pursue solutions appropriate to their organizational missions and constituencies. In these cases, solution development can occur in a decentralized manner within these entities. But more specifically, the breadth of agricultural producer needs in the region justifies sustained and systematic response. Three post assessment (solutions development) strategies are proposed to advance this:

1. Existing solutions/resources aggregation. Many though not most needs identified by producers in this assessment could be addressed with existing resources, enhanced awareness of them, or new applications of them. An initial attempt was made in this report to aggregate solutions resources. Following producer data collection associated with this needs assessment, draft results were circulated to a list of farm support organizations in south Puget Sound. Organization contacts were asked to read over Results Summaries (p. 10), and identify programming resources within their organizations addressing stated needs. The ‘Resources and solutions’ section (p. 24) summarizes these resources. Documentation of these needs/resources pairings will

6 | P a g e

continue to be updated on the WSU Thurston County Agriculture webpage (http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/).

2. Develop research and education programs at WSU Thurston County Extension. The agriculture program at the WSU Thurston County Extension office is focusing on three work areas emerging directly from this project:

a. Increase market access for agricultural producers. Raw agricultural materials command a relatively small share of overall consumer expenditures (i.e. the value of wheat in bread). Strategies such as direct- marketing, and value-added processing can be expanded and extended to new communities. This can improve farm viability by developing higher-profit marketing pathways and products. Trialing new crops and new varieties expands markets, such as trialing regionally adapted barley varieties for livestock feed, brewing or malting. Thurston County Extension is and will increase programming in variety testing, engaging in consumer educational efforts/campaigns about the importance of buying direct and local from farmers, and exploring opportunities for marketing infrastructure and equipment, and other work. For more information visit: http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/market-access/

b. Support conservation on working lands to help minimize regulatory challenges that farmers face. In April 2017 Thurston County successfully submitted a Voluntary Stewardship Plan (VSP) to the Washington Conservation Commission, and at the same time was developing a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) impacting prairie land in Thurston County. Conservation programs can put pressure on agricultural lands, but VSP and HCP provide opportunities for farmers to implement conservation practices while remaining economically viable. This WSU Extension program will support voluntary on- farm conservation efforts through research and education that demonstrates and evaluates on-farm conservation practices. This work will also provide information to decision-makers and conservation partners (NRCS, Conservation Districts and other) on how to encourage and incentivize on-farm conservation. For more information visit: http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/on-farm- conservation/

c. Encourage and support innovation on the farm and in the farming community. South Puget Sound farmers constantly innovate with new infrastructure and equipment, new farm-originated inventions, new fertility management tools, new pest management practices and many others. But innovation can be risky and as a result some promising products, equipment and management practices are not tested or adopted. The WSU Thurston County Extension agriculture program will encourage innovation by trialing promising crops, varieties and products, sourcing funding for on-farm research, creating networking opportunities for farmers to share innovative practices, hosting technical experts (farmers and academics) at workshops and trainings to spread innovative practices, and host farm planning courses for new farmers. For more information visit: http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/management/farm-training-networking/

3. Coordinated community response. A coordinated community response may or may not be feasible in addressing producer needs in the region. However, opportunities do exist to link efforts:  County governments coordinate efforts to support agricultural activities  Regional food system councils/networks address farm and food system work collaboratively; work of an existing network could be expanded (https://ssfoodsystemnetwork.org/)  Producer associations, commodity commissions and federations advance a common research and development agenda  Producer cooperative is established to address specific farm needs, such as the Siskiyou Sustainable Cooperative (http://www.siskiyoucoop.com/) 7 | P a g e

Executive Summary: The “Big Three”

Research, education, networking and information sharing (R&E) was commented on the most in this needs assessment, and was most often commented on in relation to other specific needs areas, such as training for food safety regulations. For this reason, the R&E category is best understood as a critical tool to address other needs identified by producers. Many farmer needs could be at least partially addressed by improved access to research, information resources, and networking with other farmers. As a universally applicable tool rather than a specific need area, the R&E needs area is separated from “The Big Three” identified in this assessment, which are:

 Market access (removing physical and social barriers to high value markets)  Access to productive resources (land and water)  Regulations

These rankings are based on (1) the number of comments documented per needs area, (2) a measure of the relatedness of one needs area to other needs (see methods), and lastly (3) a review by a local panel of farmers and Thurston County agriculture committee members. Figure 3 reports the results of assessment rankings.

Market access: Among the ten needs areas identified in this assessment, ‘Marketing’ and Figure 3. Grouped ranking of producer needs based on number of ‘Capital, Infrastructure and Equipment’ are comments, relatedness of a needs area to other areas (References to other areas), and panel prioritization. R&E: training, education, consolidated here because the former focuses on networking and information resources; Market access: physical social barriers to expanding market access, while barriers (capital, equipment and infrastructure) and social barriers the latter focuses on physical barriers. Combined, (marketing, price perceptions) to markets; Regulations; and Cons. removing barriers to market access emerges as a Ed: consumer education. primary needs area for farmers in the region, addressing issues on the physical barriers side such as: equipment needs, processing and storage facilities, feed grain and seed processing, and variety trialing; and on the social barriers side such as: consumer perceptions about cost, loss of market share for local farmers, collective marketing, and marketing skills.

Productive resources: Needs related to access to land and water were identified as two of the ten categories in this needs assessment (Figure 4). They are combined here because access to basic productive resources is a coherent, basic need among farmers in Thurston County. This need is compounded by escalating land prices and increasing competition for water resources, both driven by development pressure and resource conservation issues. Producer needs in relation to land and water included knowledge of available farmland (database) for lease or purchase, more purchase of development right opportunities, zoning compatible with long-term agriculture, consultation with farmers concerning critical species/habitat decisions, better financing options, succession planning resources and tools, water use adaptation recommendations and farmer networking to respond to climate change, water conservation planning resources, and support and more tools for water rights identification, acquisition, banking and trading.

8 | P a g e

Regulations: Regulatory issues ranked high (on their own, ungrouped) as one of ten needs categories. Needs regarding regulatory issues were widely linked to other needs, such as access to land, to water and water rights, and to labor, as well as in relation to taxation and insurance issues, among other needs. Regulations were seen as often at odds with sustaining long-term agriculture in South Puget Sound. Agricultural producers wanted more local control over decisions restricting use of productive farmland, site specific (not one- sized) tools to co-manage natural resources and farm operations, cooperative and not punitive relations with regulators, support navigating Figure 4. Ungrouped ranking of ten producer needs categories based on regulations such as concerning food safety, size- number of comments, relatedness of a needs area to other areas neutral taxation structures, and more cost- (References to other areas), and panel prioritization. R&E: training, share and incentives for the ecosystem services education, networking and information resources; CEI: Capital, Equipment and natural resource management that farmers and Infrastructure (indication of physical barriers to market access); are currently managing for, and increasingly Markets (indication of social barriers to market access); Cons. Ed: consumer being required to manage for. education.

Research, education, networking & info-resources

R&E, networking

Marketing and Regulations, taxes and Land and water issues equipment/infrastructure to insurance access markets Market access Productive resources Regulations

9 | P a g e

Summaries of agricultural producer needs

Capital, Equipment, Infrastructure  Comments: 27 ______ Reference count: 63 Equipment  Cross-reference count: 83 Farmers seek increased accessibility to large equipment and support  Rank by reference count: transporting it as well as medium sized equipment that is easier to transport  3 out of 10  Rank by cross-reference Shared refrig/freezer space and dry storage is sought, as well as infrastructure for affordable, collective processing count:  3 out of 10 An entity to purchase more shared equipment is sought. Farmers would like to see the development of an equipment library for small farms equipment Ranking: Cross Lacking recycling Reference Count infrastructure for t- tape, agro bond, and agricultural plastics

R&E

Pest Regs

Land

Labor Water

Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed Capital…

Financial Photo credit: Shared Use Kitchen Planning Toolkit Farmers feel there is ~Priority mark themes not enough cost share money available for improvements, and that loans and Access to loans/credit/net credit are difficult to access. Farmers are seeking increased availability of equity, grain access, shared cost-share programs and support in purchasing and leasing land equipment/size variable, A challenge exists in accessing and using personal net equity and a 10% line new grain product of credit on gross sales could help this development, cost share money, food processing Grain education/equipment, cold Livestock farmers are challenged in storage, transporting large accessing local and organic feed. equipment, financial support Much of the high volume feed is GM accessing land, recycling and comes from far away. There exists infrastructure, bee a perceived difficulty in producing high integration, product volume organic, non-GMO grain locally. Increased incentives for diversification growing grain, increased access to land and access to processing equipment is seen as a way to counter Feed peas, Hidden River Farms this

Vegetable farmers want to integrate grain in rotations but lack infrastructure such as a mill, seed cleaning and grain processing equipment 10 | P a g e

Farmers also seek support in developing multiple end uses for grain and ability to market them and would like to have access to a network of existing grain markets

An interest exists for increased grain research to assist adoption, increased trialing for feed crops, production systems and sprouted grains for feed

Livestock All Crop, Kirsop Farm Farmers expressed a need for livestock infrastructure from enterprise specific to general. Key needs are identified as cold storage for meat producers, feed production equipment, and capacity for specialty products such as cooperative wool mill and equipment

Improved and diversified livestock genetics are identified as a need, such as for improved meat production and breeding stock

Production, Expansion, Diversification Farmers would like to see an expansion of small farms with greater diversity, such as more livestock operations, vine, tree, nut, production, and apiculture

A deficiency of bee integration has been observed

Many producers lack access to cold storage due to affordability or lack of space.

A need exists for food processing infrastructure to help utilize excess of food product. A shared commercial processing kitchen is a potential solution

Colvin Ranch. Photo credit: Lucas Patzek

11 | P a g e

Consumer Education ______

Buy Local  Comments: 17 There is a perceived deficiency in the buy local economy. Some would like  Reference count: 34 increased public education on the true cost of producing food and the  Cross-reference count: 57 difference between “true local” vs. big box organics  Rank by reference count:  6 out of 10 Some believe increasing awareness of SNAP and EBT programs among farmers would increase purchasing options for consumers who receive  Rank by cross-reference benefits count:  6 out of 10 It is thought that children and youth influence family grocery purchasing and that increased education on healthy eating for children and youth would support the local foods economy Ranking: Cross Reference Count Communication

There exists polarization and poor communicaion between groups with

different values

A need is perceived for consumer education campaigns about the difference

between local farming and big box organic

R&E

Pest

Regs Land

Labor

Water

Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed Cooking Capital… There is interest in seeing increased public education on cooking seasonally and food preservation techniques. Farmers lack time to teach and have ~Priority mark themes questions about what entities have capacity to offer classes Expand buy local economy, cost of food, cooking fresh There is a perception that restaurant cooks lack skills to utilize local/seasonal foods, healthy eating for kids products and that a need exists to adapt culinary training to focus more on cooking fresh, seasonal foods

Many would like increased education that engages children and youth including cannery camps and more SNAP-ED programs in schools

Cost & seasonality Farmers perceive consumers as lacking an understanding of the true cost of food, as well as the importance of shopping with the growing season

Forestry Some foresters observe a negative public perception of clear- cutting and other forest management practices, and would like increased education to the consumer about the values of this practice Farm walk with public in south Puget Sound 12 | P a g e

Farm Inputs ______

Biodiversity  Comments: 19 There are concerns about depleting bee populations. Too much trucking  Reference count: 20 around bees is seen as a concern. Farmers would like to see increased  Cross-reference count: 21 diversity of products, more consistent season-long bloom and the use of  Rank by reference count: hedgerows to attract native bees. Domesticated bees could be increased with  10 out of 10 the use of contract apiarists. Educational pollinator gardens are seen as an  Rank by cross-reference important tool count: Energy  10 out of 10 A need is observed for increased alternative energy on farms. Energy costs are felt to be high and sporadic. Farmers would like support in accessing affordable wind and solar power including access to loans and grants that Ranking: Cross Reference Count are easy to complete Feed Livestock producers are challenged in accessing local, non GMO feed in bulk. An abundance of feed is being brought in. Hay grown locally is said to be from large farms that have a perceived monopoly on production. Farmers are

seeking a data base of local hay producers

R&E

Pest

Regs

Land

Labor Water

Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed Purchasing feed in small quantities is expensive and feed available in bulk Capital… purchasing is sought as well as increased access to storage Farmers would like access to data to match production type to site and vice ~Priority mark themes versa Access to local grain, Soil Amendments alternative energy/grants, Direct access to adequate manure is seen as a challenge. Increased truck access to organic manure- delivery is seen as a need. A database of manure and hay producers, product based compost, support types, processing information, weight, cost, and nutrient value is sought bee populations Farmers who experience rocky and compacted soil seek efficient and expedient techniques to improve soil structure There is a stated need for increased biosecurity around farm inputs including more precaution around avian flu

Dairy farmers seek a way to deal with an abundance of dairy solids in the winter. A network to find outlets for dairy solids is sought. Some would also like to see research on the potential of dairy solids as a fertilizer and strategies to lower dairy soil nutrient levels through crop uptake Some are lacking adequate composting facilities and express interest in a cost-share solution. Technical/educational assistance on advanced composting infrastructure is sought Phacelia cover crop for pollinators

13 | P a g e

Labor ______Access  Comments: 14 Farmers express lacking access to adequate labor, including temporary/part-  Reference count: 20 time labor for weed control, haying, packing, and processing. Easy-to-use  Cross-reference count: 23 networks for accessing labor are needed such as community crews,  information hubs and farm intern programs Rank by reference count:  8 out of 10 It is perceived among some that work ethic is lacking among the non-  Rank by cross-reference immigrant population count: Retention  9 out of 10 Farmers experience challenges providing livable wages, adequate health care, and have trouble providing other incentives to retain long-term, high- Ranking: Cross quality workers. There is interest in mechanisms to retain laborers such as Reference Count profit-sharing and equity positions. Perceived root causes include:  A market-driven by low-priced food, and consumers who don’t understand real costs of production and the value of good food. Small farms express challenges competing at low cost  overwhelming labor regulations

 lack of free and adequate healthcare

R&E

Pest

Regs

Land

Labor Water

Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed Training and Education Capital…

A need for increased access to technical education and training for labor ~Priority mark themes force is expressed Retaining long-term labor, wages and benefits, owner Farmers observe a lack of youth interest in farming, and seek increased labor exhausted, labor access for youth to engage in apprenticeships and internships regulations, student Sustainability interns, low cost of food, low worker interest/ethic, Farmer-operators face burn-out and strategies are sought to: streamline workforce training, access regulatory and labor regulations to get help; more information/ to labor force, community demonstrations on how to mechanize and scale production for efficiencies; labor sharing

State-run benefits packages to assist farmers and retain laborers was of interest

Access to health care and preventive medicine is lacking. There is a need for farmer physical therapy, chiropractic work, massage and other support for health preservation and injury prevention

14 | P a g e Evergreen students learning from an old-timer

Land ______Expansion  Comments: 32  Reference Count: 51 There is perceived dearth of affordable/leasable farmland. Produce farmers  Cross-reference count: 57 would like to see increased land ownership and increased contiguous land for  Rank by reference count: better efficiency  5 out of 10 Livestock producers are seeking more contiguous land for beef production  5: Rank by cross- and more grazing land in general. Producers seek a database of landowners reference count who rent land for grazing  5 out of 10

Farmland Conservation

A lack of sufficient conservation of farmland is perceived and some would like Ranking: Cross Reference Count to see increased value in preserving, restoring and expanding agriculture lands. Some would like to see increased efforts to improve pasture and forest health to help sustain future farming

Farmers feel overwhelmed by development pressure and would like to see increased zoning to resist over-development. The selling off of development

rights is a concern and some would like a trusted agency to hold conservation

R&E

Pest

Regs Land

Labor Water

easements. Increased tools to retain more contiguous land is sought Inputs

Markets

Cons. Ed Capital… Some feel that rezoning and critical habitat decisions are happening without

consulting or compensating farmers ~Priority mark themes

Access to land, challenges with land cost, easier/broader financing options, multi-use land, farmland conservation,

carbon sequestration incentives, valuation for forested land, support in succession planning

Leon Giles' Blueberry Farm just outside of Olympia, WA abutting a neighbor's livestock operation. Many of the blueberry bushes were planted by Leon's

father in the 1940s. Photo credit: Lucas Patzek

15 | P a g e

Financial

Farmland is high value and landowners are seen as predominantly wealthy. Farmers would like increased access to land at reasonable rates and increased access to multi-use land. Mortgage rates are seen as disproportionate to farmer incomes

Many feel land cost is excessive. Famers seek easier financing options and alternatives to the Northwest Farm Credit Services programs, land trusts, zoning changes and development rights

Forestry

Greater social commitment to proper forest management is needed, financing for forest easement programs, and more avenues for public participation in forest management/ stewardship

Long term planning on agroforestry is sought including investments in transfer of development rights and conservation easement programs

Forested land is known to add value (ecological) and a need exists for a valuation method for standing trees, because current incentives are all in harvest and residential development. For example, some would like to see increased carbon sequestration compensation, among other options

Succession Planning

Farmers express uncertainty of succession of future farmers and would like access to succession planning that already exists. A legacy plan for retirement is also seen as a priority

Increased avenues for continuity and retention of young upcoming farmers is seen as a priority. Mentorship programs for new or aspiring farmers could help with this

Farmers would like to see increased land trust support for future leasing /ownership of farms. Land managers would also like to have easier access to Transfer of Development Right Programs

A trusted entity is sought to hold conservation easements, which would help secure transition plans in situations with uninterested heirs

Trellis, Let Us Farm

16 | P a g e

Marketing ______

Local Market Access  Comments: 33  Reference Count: 58 Small farmers are struggling to access institutional buyers due to challenges  Cross-reference count: 65 with managing high volumes, matching products sought, insurance  Rank by reference count: requirements and a lack of standard pricing from multiple producers  4 out of 10  Rank by cross-reference Many producers see a mismatch between the costs of local production and count: prices consumers and restaurants are willing to pay. Farmers would like to  see an expanded market during peak growing season and increased options 4 out of 10 to sell directly to consumers. Some ideas to support this include: Ranking: Cross Reference Count  increased access to regional farmer’s markets that are tourist themed; less farm agri-tourism regulation  increase whole-sale prices, more control of wholesale prices  develop a surplus market  develop an information hub that tracks produce supplies that

are season specific

R&E

Pest Regs

 increased avenues for community-shared purchasing Land

Labor

Water

Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed  develop a Thurston Co/South Sound label Capital…

 narrow the definition of local to range within the south sound  explore the development of buy local rewards cards  utilize local produce prescriptions, and corporate wellness ~Priority mark themes programs Broad-based shared

marketing, marketing Farmers would like to improve and expand relations with restaurants. Some training/education, social would like to see increased education/training opportunities to restaurants media, aggregate on utilizing seasonal CSA products. Weekly features or monthly tastings production, new could help increase sales and pay out. Also, some would like to explore the product/research and design, on-farm restaurant model diversification, support buy local market, surplus market, The local market for beef is small. Livestock producers need access to increased USDA meat processing market imbalanced/narrow, large scale affordable Market Scale production, local beef market small, access to USDA There is a growth in large scale organics and some have observed large scale slaughtering organic farms utilizing misleading local packaging are cutting into sales and profit margins

Small, local farms perceive shrinking market for local, direct-from-farmer sales, and increasing competition. Some ideas on how to increase consumer commitment to local farms include:

 tax credits for purchases of local foods

17 | P a g e

 product aggregation to reach new/larger markets  Olympia local brand that could include a subsidy for producers who are willing to participate  More opportunity for on-farm sales (farm restaurants, winery, etc)

Dairy farmers are challenged in being locked into restrictive contracts which limit their ability to sell to other buyers

Marketing costs are high and some would like to see a shared Farm to Fork Networking Event. Photo marketing pool to reduce costs credit: Thurston Talk. Technical Assistance

Some would like to see more education opportunities, technical assistance and intern support with online marketing resources including web design and social media strategies

Many farmers lack time and expertise needed for marketing and are challenged finding broader markets

Famers could benefit from technical assistance to help with marketing to new audiences, producing and marketing diverse product types and increasing farmer access to data on best practices, food safety training (GAPs)

Helsing Junction marketing photo. Photo credit: Helsing Junction Farm.

Olympia restaurant owners at Olympia Berries from Johnson Berry Farm. Farmers Market (Our Table, Blissful Photo credit: Olympia Farmers’ Wonders, San Francisco St Baker. Photo Market. credit: Bountiful Byway.

18 | P a g e

Pest Pressure

______ Comments: 17 Challenges  Reference count: 18 Many farmers are lacking the time, resources and best practices to effectively  Cross-reference count: 24 manage weed control. Some challenging weeds noted by farmers include  Rank by reference count: thistle, tansy, bracken fern, morning glory, buttercup and Scotch broom  10 out of 10  Rank by cross-reference There is a perception that pest pressure is increasing including east coast pests, broccoli black heart, cane borer, spotted wing fruit fly and soil count: pathogens  8 out of 10

Concerns exist around herbicide and pesticide application negatively impacting pollinators, soil and water Ranking: Cross Reference Count Deer fencing is seen as cost prohibitive and financial support is sought

Technical Assistance/Education Farmers would like to have increased avenues to share best practices on pest

and weed pressure as well as more educational opportunities on topics like R&E

biological control, organic solutions and use of goats for management Pest

Regs

Land

Labor Water

Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed More workshops, classes, information, knowing what others are doing, cost- Capital… saving techniques Public education on herbicide and pesticide product usage is sought including ~Priority mark themes better labeling and targeted education materials at stores and institutions Local lab resources, nutrient such as schools and hospitals testing, weed control Farmers seek analytical support, access to labs, in identifying pathogens and research, tech other soil diseases and deficiencies support/education Lacking coordinated community interest in weed control; interest was expressed in partnerships between County Weed Board, Extension, community groups like Boy Scouts and 4-H, and neighbors

Cabbage maggot. Photo credit: Raspberry cane borer. Photo credit: https://pnwhandbooks.org/insect/v https://pnwhandbooks.org/insect/s egetable/vegetable-pests/hosts- mall-fruit/cane-fruit/cane-fruit- pests/kohlrabi-cabbage-maggot raspberry-crown-borer

19 | P a g e

Regulatory

______Conservation and Production  Comments: 30  Reference count: 66 Some would like to see more local (less federal) control and farmer input on  Cross-reference count: 106 farm policies and regulations. There is perceived need for farm education for policy makers on how conservation issues affect farmers  Rank by reference count:  2 out of 10 Some feel there is lack of farm outreach information about environmental  Rank by cross-reference issues and regulations that affect farmers from government entities; i.e. the Oregon Spotted Frog count: 2 out of 10

Lacking the regulatory framework to stay in agriculture; rules that work with farmers to maintain long-term agriculture are need concerning road Ranking: Cross development, storm water management, cultural studies, others Reference Count Farmers are concerned about impact to land values and farm operations of critical species listing (Mazama Pocket Gopher, others), and feel farmers are less valued than listed species

Concerns exist about federal regulations shutting down farms for potential to

pollute. Some would like to see financial incentives, like tax-breaks, for

R&E

Pest

Regs

Land

Labor Water

implementing conservation practices. Farm land is thought to be declining or Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed unusable do to perceived excessive water pollution regulation Capital… Some land managers perceive that agencies spend a lot of energy on penalization and not enough energy in problem solving ~Priority mark themes The Thurston County Right of Way is seen to be hindering production. Concerns exist about inconsistent mowing in Tumwater and Tenino Tax equity/reform, over- regulation, local vs. federal Foresters are challenged with managing riparian buffer zones and believe control of policy, policy that a forest riparian easement could be a more common sense alternative then fixed width buffers reform, farmland designation, equity in Liability and Insurance livestock production, equity Many farms are lacking adequate insurance due to high rates including in subsidies/exemptions, health insurance for workers, farm liability insurance and crops and animals organic certification insurance challenges, challenges with food safety regulations Insurance requirements are felt to be increasing as larger operations insulate

risk. Additionally, some carriers are stepping back from covering smaller farms. Thoughts on solutions include:

 broader policies to cover a greater diversity of products; i.e. lavender farmers are not covered to produce honey  increased access to insurers who work with small scale operations, and insurance reforms that considers the needs of small farms  cooperative insurance pools to share costs; i.e. Granges  increased access to federal coverage; i.e. utilize the Farm Bill

20 | P a g e

Labor and Industry requirements are felt to be burdensome. Some would also like to see age regulations for young farmers adjusted (lowered? In order to engage more youth)

Public Health and Consumer Organic certification is felt to be expensive, complicated and lengthy. Farmers would like to see the process simplified (less paperwork) and to have technical support in the application process Many food safety regulations are geared for large scale farms which creates a perceived economic burden on small farms and reduces consumer access. Examples of regulations of concern include shelf life expiration, animal fee regulations, CSA inspection, refrigeration of spent grain, and refrigeration at farmer’s markets

Many farmers would like to see future regulations that are specific to farm size to even the playing field between large and small farms

Scale: Small Farms vs. Large Farms Many small farmers feel that regulations disproportionately support larger farms Some felt that a lack of subsidies exist that support small livestock producers. There are examples of exemptions for small livestock producers in Oregon and Idaho Farmers expressed that regulation is broad-based and should be more specific to farm type and size so not to overlook small farms. Some would like to see incentives for time spent understanding and complying with regulations Restrictions on selling directly from farm stands are thought to limit direct sales. There are also challenges expressed around the difficulty selling product to businesses and institutions due to insurance requirements, regulations and risk Taxes Some farmers expressed that taxes disproportionately affect small farms (<20 acres) and that tax reforms could help to level the playing field. Property size is the main determinant for land in the Open Space Agricultural Conservation law, and home site exemption on under 20 acre parcels hurts small producers Small farmer have concerns that they could owe back taxes if the attempt to designate and fail It is perceived that big timber farms receive disproportionate tax breaks and reform is needed

21 | P a g e

Research, Education, Networking, Information Resources ______Farmer Education and Training

Farmers seek increased access to education and training opportunities for  Comments: 29 farm support skills including mechanics, equipment operations, basic large  Reference count: 120 animal veterinary, perennial crop production, product diversification,  Cross-reference count: irrigation, composting, pollinator habitat conservation, pasture management 163 and agricultural tourism  Rank by reference count:  1 out of 10 A vital support network is sought for farm skills training that is accessible and  Rank by cross-reference free to affordable count: Farmers would like to see networks developed for farmer to farmer  1 out of 10 mentoring and shared learnings. On-farm demonstrations are seen as a valuable tool Ranking: Cross Reference Count Increased networking is also seen as a mechanism to build relationships and increase farmer visibility, as farmers feel they are lacking a voice on community issues and regulatory reform Technical Assistance

Farmers are seeking technical support from folks with on-the-ground

R&E

Pest Regs

experience, balancing technical/theoretical and practical information in Land

Labor

Water

Inputs

Markets Cons. Ed useable format, including access to science-based best practices, and energy Capital… topics. There is interest in greater collaboration with WSU and Natural Resources Conservation Service in identifying such support ~Priorities mark themes Increased information is wanted on diversification of production, and how to Regional agricultural develop new product types. This includes assistance in utilizing perennial economic data, farm crops including appropriate selection, access to markets, and general mentorships, academic vs. management practices/recommendations grounded farmer assistance, Tools for improved financial management are needed, such as access to collaboration WSU and other software and training in its use, including accounting/financial management agencies, farmer input in More ready access to technical information is also needed, such as for policy, youth engagement, analytical labs, promising local markets, valuation of local agricultural new product support, economy, new crop opportunities, and updates on hot topics such GMOs perennials, grant support Land managers seek support completing paperwork including help with and follow-up assistance, stewardship plans and in finding and submitting grants technical training, veterinary skills Youth Education and Engagement Farmers would like to see greater integration with new/young farmers and youth in local agricultural practice to support future farming. Supporting access and opportunities for apprenticeships, paid-internships and engagement in education programs like 4-H and Future Farmers of America would drive this goal

22 | P a g e Pasture management workshop. Photo credit: Lucas Patzek. Water Resource Management

______

Climate Change  Comments: 17  Reference count: 24 Farmers feel there is a general lack of expertise and training for adapting  Cross-reference count: 42 farm technique to climate change. There is an interest in learning about  Rank reference count: what water infrastructure will be needed to address warmer weather  7 out of 10 Farmer to farmer mentoring and networking could help to address future  Rank by cross-reference climate related issue count:  7 out of 10 Water Conservation

Farmers observe that water access is depleting as city wells are draining groundwater supplies. Development on wetlands is also seen to deplete access Ranking: Cross-reference Farmers would like to access more site specific water conservation education, Count and improved future planning on conservation. Access to technical support with improved irrigation technique and water retention is sought

Water Rights

Pest

Regs

Land Labor

Many smaller scale farmers are burdened by water access restrictions TENIR

Water

Inputs

Capital,… Consum… including the “use it, or lose it”. There is a perceived imbalance between Markets return on crops and the water usage requirements needed to maintain water right. ~Priority mark themes Banking and trading programs are distrusted as are Department of Ecology Climate change and farming, water rights programs. Stronger relationships between farmers and challenges with water Department of Ecology staff could help resolve issues, improve trust, and lessen conflict and possible litigation access/city aquifer, more options for Additional solutions-based opinions on water rights include: banking/trading/transferring water, clarification/reform  expansion of options for banking and trading water of water rights policy  expansion of water right transfers that are limited to trading downstream  increased technical assistance with certain water access programs that are unclear and involve cumbersome application processes; create water rights liaison position  Clarification/information about minimums and maximums concerning water rights/exemptions WSU drip irrigation workshop. Photo credit: Karie Christensen. 23 | P a g e

Available Resources, Solutions Addressing Producer Needs

Results from the needs assessment were circulated to regional organizations and agencies that work on agricultural development. Input was solicited on existing solutions/resources within these entities that address farmer needs as raised in this assessment. The following is an initial list of resources that address, though in most cases do not entirely resolve the identified need. However, study authors thought it would be useful to attempt to assemble existing resources that address or help to address the needs of agricultural producers in the south Puget Sound. This resource list will subsequently be updated and hosted at: http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/farming-news-resources/.

Need area Entity Resources that address needs Capital, equipment, infrastructure Access to Thurston EDC Thurston Investment Network (ThINk): Matching Thurston County residents who capital are interested in lending directly to locally-owned small businesses with local businesses seeking capital.  www.thurstonedc.com/think/; contact: Aslan Meade: 360-789-8843; [email protected] Cold storage FSA The Farm Service Agency’s Farm Storage Facility Loan program offers low interest financing for cold storage as well as other storage and washing and handling facilities. Additionally, FSA finances equipment and other farm infrastructure through the more general loan programs.  Farm Storage Facility Loan Fact Sheet. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA- FSA-Public/usdafiles/FactSheets/2016/2016_farm_storage_facility_loans.pdf  Farm Service Agency website for loan programs https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/farm-loan-programs/index Cost share Thurston Cost share available for farm improvements (fencing, planting, watering facilities, money Cons. District heavy use areas, gutters/downspouts, manure storage/composting structures, etc.) available for as grant funding available. Contact: Robin Buckingham, Resource Specialist: farm 360.754.3588 x134 improvements https://www.thurstoncd.com/ Equipment NRCS Rural Business Development Grant (RBDG) can pay for processing equipment and shortage the like by funding a non profit, municipality, public body, etc. The entity in turn can lease to group of farmers or individual farmer(s). Funding is limited and project are scored for competition. I recommend small grant asks of less than $30,000 in this grant. This grant can cover planning type expenses such as design/engineering costs. https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/rural-business-development-grants Financial/ NRCS Rural Micro entrepreneurship Assistance Program (RMAP) loans of less than lending $50,000 from funded organizations such as Enterprise for Equity and Community resources Capital Development www.seattleccd.com  For Vertically Integrated Business Models (NOT farm loan or farm operating loans):  Business & Industry Guaranteed loan program https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/business-industry-loan-guarantees Financial/ WSDA Support and information on business financing for farms lending  http://agr.wa.gov/Marketing/SmallFarm/Financing.aspx resources

24 | P a g e

Financial/ Thurston EDC Small Business Development Center (SBDC), advises existing businesses on all lending manner of financial management and planning, and assists with loan preparation. services  http://www.thurstonedc.com/small-business-counseling-sbdc/; Contact: Ron Nielsen at [email protected]  Increasing WSU One of three work areas for Thurston County Extension research and education market access programming. Contact Thurston County Extension program: [email protected] http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/market-access/ Low-cost Thurston Low-cost equipment rental program with small farm equipment. Currently equipment Cons. District expanding to medium/large scale equipment as producer demand arises. rental/library  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/services/equipment-rental/ More cost- FSA The Farm Service Agency provides low-interest financing for farmers/ranchers. share money Financing may be used for operating expenses or to purchase or expand a farm operation.  Farm Service Agency website for loan programs - https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/farm-loan-programs/index Product NRCS Value Added Producer Grant (VAPG) for either Planning or Working Capital for development eligible purposes. This is a 50% grant requiring 50% match made up of any of the following: Cash, Third Party, Applicant+ In Kind, Commodity. https://www.rd.usda.gov/files/4284j.pdf and Application Toolkit at this site. Renewable NRCS Renewable Energy for America (REAP) program for farmers, ranchers (rural and energy on the urban) and small businesses (rural). This 25% grant can be used for on farm Energy farm Efficiency Improvements (lighting, hvac, equipment improvements, etc.) and/or Renewable Energy such as Solar PV, digester, etc.  https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/rural-energy-america-program- renewable-energy-systems-energy-efficiency/wa Lacking Thurston TCD formerly ran an ag plastics recycling program in TC with varied success. We recycling Cons. District, have a lot of feedback to share on the creation of a new program and could perhaps infrastructure partners be involved in future development of this service. ag plastics needed Consumer education Deficient buy Thurston EDC The South Thurston Economic Development Initiative (STEDI) is a collaborative local program across cities of Rochester, Grand Mound, Tenino, Bucoda, Rainer, Yelm, Roy & McKenna. “Shop South” rural buy-local campaign launches June, 2017.  http://www.thurstonedc.com/stedi/ (Aslan Meade: 360-789-8843) Deficient buy South Sound 2017 Local Food Campaign local program Food System  https://ssfoodsystemnetwork.org/ Network  Meetings 1st Wed of month, 9:30-11:30, TRPC  2017 Food Summit Save the Date: October 20th, 21st Cooking edu. SPSCC SPSCC’s Culinary Arts program provides knowledge and skills in the areas of food for local production. Specialty classes can range from craft brewing and distilling to owning public, chefs and operating a food truck.  https://spscc.edu/areas/culinary/cap-deg Lacking Visitor and The Thurston County’s Bountiful Byway promotes local flavors—identifying and support for Convention increasing customers to area farmers markets, farm stands and farm tours, buy local Bureau highlighting restaurants, breweries, and distilleries using local ingredients  https://www.bountifulbyway.com/ (360-704-7544) More options WSU Extension resources for on-farm  http://ext100.wsu.edu/maritimefruit/pollination/ (cont nxt pg) conservation

25 | P a g e

 http://horticulture.oregonstate.edu/content/integrating-beetle-habitat-pacific- northwest-farming-systems  http://xerces.org/ Farm Inputs Integrating FSA The Farm Service Agency supports youth interest in agriculture through FSA’s youth young loan programs. FSA youth loans are often used to finance 4-H and FFA projects. farmers;  https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA- internships & Public/usdafiles/FactSheets/2017/youth_loans_march2017.pdf apprentices Manure Thurston TCD maintains a manure brokering list for the community. networking Cons. District  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/resources/manure-management/ Feed Thurston TCD maintains a manure brokering list and could potentially add a local feed list as networking Cons. District well. (Sarah at TCD) Concern over FSA The Farm Service Agency financially encourages development of pollinator habitat decreasing through the Conservation Reserve Program Pollinator Initiative. bee  Pollinator Initiative fact sheet - https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA- populations Public/usdafiles/FactSheets/2015/CRPProgramsandInitiatives/honey_bee_habit at_initiative_jul2015.pdf Conservation Reserve Program - https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and- services/conservation-programs/conservation-reserve-program/index Integrating Puget Sound  http://www.pugetsoundbees.org/ bees on farms Beekeepers Association On-farm WSU One of three work areas for Thurston County Extension research and education conservation programming. Contact Thurston County Extension program: [email protected]  http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/on-farm-conservation/ Habitat for Thurston Technical assistance to increase native pollinator habitat on farmland. Occasional pollinators Cons. District cost share dollars to implement habitat projects. Contact Kathleen Berger, Habitat Specialist: 360.754.3588 x118  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/services/technical-assistance/ South Sound GREEN, a K-12 watershed education program connects youth to ag and pollinator education, including partnering to implement educational pollinator gardens. Contact Stephanie Bishop: 360.754.3588 x 108  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/south-sound-green/ Energy Puget Sound Partnering with Puget Sound Energy to offer energy efficiency audits and access to conservation Energy PSE on farm improvements and low-cost loans for additional upgrades.  Contact Sarah Isham Cann: 425.424.6649, [email protected] Renewable Thurston Thurston Energy helps residents and businesses in Thurston County save money and energy on the Energy energy in their homes by reducing operating costs and reducing env impact farm  http://thurstonenergy.org/; contact Wayne Ballew [email protected] Labor Difficult to Labor and L&I Farm Internship Project allows interns to safely work on farms to learn about access find Industries farming practices and obtain hands-on experience in farming activities. labor and  http://www.lni.wa.gov/WorkplaceRights/Agriculture/SmallFarmIntership/defau interns lt.asp Difficult to Tilth Alliance Tilth Alliance Internship Listings provides state-wide clearinghouse of farm find student internship opportunities. Farmers can post intern opportunities here. interns http://tilthproducers.org/farmer-resources/internships/

26 | P a g e

Lack of youth Thurston Pathways to Ag Jobs forums in partnership with WSU 4H Thurston County to aid in interest in Cons. District, the transition for youth interested in careers in ag. Contact Nora White, Ed & farming WSU Outreach Coordinator: 360.754.3588 x 105 Lacking Thurston  South Sound FarmLink has entertained the idea of including a farm labor network for Cons. District network for new and expanding farms to post jobs and find qualified help. accessing labor crews, interns Technical WSU Thurston County Extension courses (contact [email protected]) training  10-wk Cultivating Success Farm Production Planning course Jan-Mar annually  Other training/education/workshops available upon request Technical Thurston Workshops and tours training Conservation  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/workshops-tours/ District Technical The Evergreen Practical and theoretical hands-on training in agriculture; possible interns available training State College  http://evergreen.edu/organicfarm Land Easements for Thurston The Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program offers farmers riparian riparian areas Cons. District restoration and compensation for termed easements on salmon bearing streams. https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/programs/crep-conservation-reserve- enhancement-program/ Farmland Thurston This committee meets last Thursday of each month, WSU Extension Office 7-9pm; conservation County one goal in the Working Lands Strategic Plan guiding this group is farmland needed Agriculture preservation utilizing Transfer of Development Rights program. Committee Farmland Thurston South Sound FarmLink connects new and existing producers with landowners who access, Cons. District have land available to be farmed for lease or purchase. preservation  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/programs/south-sound-farmlink/ & succession TCD is furthering farmland preservation efforts through the creation of a working lands easement program. Contact Sarah Moorehead: 360.754.3588 x 136 Farmland South Sound Farmland preservation program in south Puget Sound access & Community http://www.communityfarmlandtrust.org/farmland-preservation.html preservation Farmland Trust Farmland Capitol Land FURTHERING COLLABORATIVE AND STRATEGIC CONSERVATION OF SOUTHWEST access & Trust WASHINGTON’S ESSENTIAL NATURAL AREAS AND WORKING LANDS. preservation https://capitollandtrust.org/ Forest Capitol Land TCD is furthering farmland preservation efforts through the creation of a working easements for Trust, S. lands easement program. Contact Sarah Moorehead: 360.754.3588 x 136 non-harvest Sound Trust, option Thurston Cons. District Rezoning and Thurston Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP) is an approach for counties to protect critical critical habitat County areas on agricultural lands, utilizing voluntary participation from and consultation decisions Voluntary with farmers - http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/planning/vsp/voluntary-stewardship- without Stewardship home.html farmer input Program Program contact for the Working Group can be obtained from Long Range Planning division in Thurston County, or contact Thurston County Extension

27 | P a g e

Forest WA Office of Promote the vitality of farming, farmers, and ranchers by ensuring that we will easements Farmland continue to have productive agricultural lands in Washington State Preservation  http://ofp.scc.wa.gov/ Riparian DNR The Forestry Riparian Easement Program (FREP) is a voluntary program that easement as reimburses landowners for the value of the trees they are required to leave to alt. to fix- protect fish habitat width buffer  http://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/forest-practices/small-forest- landowners/forestry-riparian-easement-program Marketing Acccess to Thurston EDC The Thurston EDC’s Agriculture & Food Economy Program works to expand existing markets and develop new markets for agricultural products produced within the region.  Contact [email protected] Access to WSU WSU Extension Thurston Co. priority programming focus on market access issues: markets  http://extension.wsu.edu/thurston/agriculture/market-access/ Expand WSDA Small Farm and Direct Marketing program provides marketing information. Direct markets marketing handbook provides wealth of information for farmers expanding into during peak direct market sales. Also see marketing and business services (3rd link). season  http://agr.wa.gov/Marketing/SmallFarm/  http://agr.wa.gov/Marketing/SmallFarm/greenbook/ http://agr.wa.gov/Marketing/ Pest pressure Help with pest WSU Some diagnostic and identification resources through WSU ID  Pest ID: http://hortsense.cahnrs.wsu.edu/Home/HortsenseHome.aspx  Diagnostic clinic in Puyallup, WA: https://puyallup.wsu.edu/plantclinic/. Diagnostic services $25-$40. Pest manage- WSU  WSU Vegetable Pathology Program: ment http://mtvernon.wsu.edu/path_team/vegpath_team.htm technical  Small Fruits IPM: https://ipm.wsu.edu/small/sf.html resources  Gardening and pest management: http://gardening.wsu.edu/pest- management/ Regulations Confusion WSDA Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Small Farm Direct Marketing over direct Handbook (i.e. “Greenbook”) reviews the various state and regional regulations marketing & required for the production and sale of various food items, including fresh fruits and food safety vegetables, dairy and meat, processed products and more regulations http://agr.wa.gov/marketing/smallfarm/greenbook/  Lack of n/a  Washington House Bill 1508 liability insurance Regulations King County The King County Agriculture Program “brings together the County’s efforts to not conducive Agriculture preserve prime agricultural soils with efforts to protect water resources and ensure to long-term Program the continuing economic vitality of agriculture.” Drainage Assistance, Regulatory agriculture review to simplify and improve regulatory navigation, Puget Sound Fresh.  http://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/dnrp/wlr/sections-programs/rural-regional- services-section/agriculture-program.aspx Resources for Thurston Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP) is an approach for counties to protect critical farmers County VSP areas on agricultural lands, utilizing voluntary participation from and consultation concerning with farmers – http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/planning/vsp/voluntary-stewardship- regulations home.html (cont nxt pg) 28 | P a g e

Program contact for the Working Group can be obtained from Long Range Planning division in Thurston County, or contact Thurston County Extension Unequal n/a Washington House Bill 1544 taxation of small and large farms Training, education, networking, information resources Advanced soil WSU Existing extension resources & compost  http://csanr.wsu.edu/compost/ training  Farm compost manual, with special attention to Aerated Static Piles: https://campus.extension.org/pluginfile.php/48384/course/section/7167/NRAE S%20FarmCompost%20manual%201992.pdf  Gardening and compost/soil resources: http://gardening.wsu.edu/compost- and-mulch/  WSU Soil Management website: https://puyallup.wsu.edu/soils/ Business tools WA Center for The Washington Center for Women in Business (WCWB) supports the mission of all to support Women in Women’s Business Centers: to “level the playing field” for women entrepreneurs, women- Business who still face unique obstacles in the business world. owned http://wcwb.org/ businesses Data & Pac Mtn The Washington Pacific Mountain Research Consortium (WPMRC) provides analytical Research individuals, businesses, organizations, and governmental agencies with academic support Consortium research support for community and economic development issues and topics.  Contact: Dr. Riley Moore, 360-754-6320, or [email protected] Farm Thurston Conservation Plans are a free land management guide for landowners to jointly management Cons. District achieve the management and conservation goals. questions, Free technical assistance is available to landowners and operators to address all of conservation their resource concerns, including pest management, habitat, management plans practices, soil testing, more.  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/services/technical-assistance/ https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/services/conservation-planning/ Farmer access Thurston EDC Customized data requests and public use of searchable online database for to data commercial properties for sale/lease, Thurston County’s labor force , wages, demographics, consumer spending, business and industry, and talent pool.  www.WhyThurstonCounty.com; customized data requests contact Kyle Wiese – [email protected] (360) 464-6053 Food safety WSDA Food processing, general food safety, consultation, potential for local training regulations available. Contact Lucy Severs: (360) 902-1876 daunting  http://agr.wa.gov/FoodAnimal/FSP/  http://agr.wa.gov/FoodAnimal/FoodProcessors/  http://agr.wa.gov/FoodAnimal/FoodProcessors/facility.aspx  http://agr.wa.gov/FoodAnimal/Organic/ GAPs WSDA WSDA is offering to Washington growers, producers and shippers an auditing service throughout the food chain to verify that best practices are being followed using USDA's Good Agricultural/Good Handling Practices Audit Program (GAP/GHP).  http://agr.wa.gov/inspection/FVInspection/GAPGHP.aspx FSMA, GAPs WSU Food Safety Training available; coordinate request through county extension  http://foodsafety.wsu.edu/extension/training-programs/ (cont nxt pg) Food Safety on the Farm program. Inquire with Co. Extension for a workshop  http://foodsafety.wsu.edu/extension/pre-harvest-food-safety/ 29 | P a g e

Forest WSU, DNR WSU’s Coached Planning Course: workshops,  http://forestry.wsu.edu/nps/events/cponline/ training  http://forestry.wsu.edu/ opportunities, DNR Forest Stewardship Program, and Technical Assistance: networking,  http://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/forest-practices/small-forest- technical landowners/forest-stewardship-program assistance  http://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/forest-practices/small-forest- landowners/technical-assistance-landowners Grain WSU Regional research on grain varieties, trialing research  Growing Grains West of the Cascades: http://thebreadlab.wsu.edu/growing- grains-west-of-the-cascades/  Ongoing barley variety trials at WSU Thurston County Extension ([email protected]) Forest WSU The WSU Consulting Forester and Silvicultural Contractor Directory is a compilation management of forestry professionals around Washington State who provide the professional support, services to private forest landowners promising  http://forestry.wsu.edu/consultingdirectory/ forest  Forestry resources by topic: http://forestry.wsu.edu/resources/ products  Special forest products: http://forestry.wsu.edu/resources/#special Soil testing Thurston Basic Soil Test cost is $25. This cost includes shipping the sample to a certified soil help Cons. District lab and receiving a brief recommendation from one of our natural resource specialists: https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/services/soil-testing/ Technical Thurston Educational events, workshops and training courses are available to the community education & Cons. District on a variety of agricultural and natural resource management topics. Contact Sarah training for Moorehead: 360.754.3588 x136 labor  https://www.thurstoncd.com/index.php/workshops-tours/ Technical WSU On-farm or in-class technical training/workshops can be arranged for topics that are education & Extension of interest to farmers, from sheep care to food safety and new cultivating training for equipment (and other). Ask and we’ll work to arrange it. Contact labor [email protected]

Tools for Thurston EDC  For general assistance accessing Thurston EDC programs, contact Ryan Norskog: improved 360-464-6060; [email protected] financial  Business TuneUp is an 8-week training program that teaches you the tools you management need to improve your business: http://businesstuneup.org/  ScaleUp is a business growth training program; in-person classroom training and one-on-one coaching: http://scaleupthurston.org/  PTAC (Procurement Technical Assistance Center) provides assistance for small businesses to market to the government, solicitations, drawings, and other areas relating to selling to the government: http://washingtonptac.org/  SCORE counselors serve beginning stage and start-up businesses. Free one on one coaching sessions available.  Veteran entrepreneurial support and skills training while soldiers are in the process of transitioning http://www.thurstonedc.com/veterans/ Business tools WA Center for The Washington Center for Women in Business (WCWB) supports the mission of all to support Women in Women’s Business Centers: to “level the playing field” for women entrepreneurs, women- Business who still face unique obstacles in the business world. owned  http://wcwb.org/ contact: Traci Hansen [email protected] businesses

30 | P a g e

Tools for Small Business Small Business Counceling: Ron Nielson works with Thurston County farmers improved Development regarding financial statement analysis, identify ways to improve operational financial Center efficiency, financial forecasting, develop business plans, and other services management  http://www.thurstonedc.com/small-business-counseling-sbdc/ Tools for Enterprise for This is a high-quality, research-based approach to business planning for food- and improved Equity, WSU farm-based entrepreneurs in the South Puget Sound. financial  http://www.enterpriseforequity.org/agripreneur/ management Vital support Thurston Field day, farmer networking, and on-farm demonstration proposals welcome. network, Cons. District, These & other organizations post workshop opportunities; will expand offerings. knowing what WSU, Eastside  Thurston Conservation District, contact: [email protected] other farmers Urban Farm  Attend Coffee with your Conservation District, 1x/month. (Sarah at TCD) doing and Garden  WSU: Sign up for SouthSoundAg listserv for farmers, or follow: https://www.facebook.com/thurstonextension/  http://urbanfarmoly.com/calendar-of-events/2608389 Access to WSU Center Research and education on the critical issues facing agriculture, such as climate technical Sustaining Ag change, energy and water security, and improving technology and management information natural knowledge that will make all of our agricultural production systems more critical issues Resources sustainable. facing farmers  http://csanr.wsu.edu/ Water Resource Management Expertise on OSU, WSU, UI The AgClimate Network is a web-based hub for data, analysis and communication adapting ag to between regional scientists and stakeholders about climate change and agricultural climate and natural resources topics. A consortium of institutions including Oregon State change University, University of Idaho, and Washington State University, and individuals contribute content to this site and share articles and analyses.  https://www.agclimate.net/2017/05/02/exploring-climate-change-adaptation- strategies-for-agriculture-in-the-northwest/ Irrigation WSU Irrigation in the Pacific Northwest, information on equipment, irrigation calculators, technical soil moisture monitoring, FAQs and tutorials, etc. assistance  http://irrigation.wsu.edu/ Funding for NRCS EQIP program funds irrigation efficiency through cost-share irrigation  https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/wa/programs/financial/eqip efficiency / equipment Strategies to WSU Center Agricultural strategies that will make farming operations more resilient to climate adapt to for Sustaining change. Proceedings (open access) of the January 2017 Climate Impacts to Water climate Ag and Conference. change Natural  http://ext100.wsu.edu/water/climate-impacts-to-water-conference/ Resources Water Thurston Free technical assistance is available to landowners and operators to address all of conservation Cons. District their resource concerns. Contact Robin Buckingham, 360.754.3588 x134 information & [email protected] training

31 | P a g e

Conclusion

This report was developed with the understanding that a systematic, inclusive and region-wide agricultural producer needs assessment was necessary to provide an up-to-date documentation of the challenges facing agriculture in the region. The goals of the work were to:

 Provide WSU Extension with producer input to guide agriculture research and education programming  Provide regional organizations with producer input to guide economic development, agricultural resource conservation, and other community development and education programming  Complete a robust documentation of agricultural producer needs so individuals, agencies and organizations in the south Puget Sound region could help address these challenges

This assessment demonstrates considerable need among agricultural producers, which is not surprising given ongoing trends in agriculture. The south Puget Sound region is not alone in facing issues with aging farm populations, development pressure, impacts due to climate change, absent or dilapidated farm infrastructure, equipment availability, consolidation in the food system, habitat loss, a relatively low percentage of consumer income spent on food in the U.S., regulatory restrictions, and other factors.

Priority needs emerging from this study demonstrate considerable opportunity for investment, community response, consumer education, technical support for farmers, and policy work to improve the long-term viability of agriculture in south Puget Sound. Indeed, producer comments focused on all those aspects of production that could be considered essential to viable agricultural activities, with three primary areas surfacing in this assessment:

 The availability of productive resources, predominantly land and water  A regulatory landscape conducive both to agricultural business and regional governance, and  Market access issues concerning: o tools and physical mechanisms essential to getting product to market, such as processing infrastructure and essential equipment, as well as o a society receptive to the goods farmers have to offer, meaning: citizens who are supported in making sound nutritional decisions; ready options for the public to purchase direct from farms; clear market information (i.e. point of local origin) indicating how to purchase from farmers; a willingness to pay prices farmers need; and social support programs to fill the financial gap between fair market pricing and ability to pay

Producer needs also focused on what has been called in this report Research and Education (R&E). Much more specifically, however, producers referred to this as the need for networking mechanisms to share knowledge, access to practical technical support, opportunities for farmer-to-farmer information exchanges, and on-farm research and demonstrations to support farmer inquiry and innovation.

Less pitched, though often no less important, responses in this study focused on practical farming needs such as pest management, access to farm inputs, and labor issues. It is our hope that the results of this work contribute to region- wide efforts to address these and other producer needs.

32 | P a g e

Appendix 1. Pre-existing Regional Farm Needs Assessments

The goals of the pre-assessment were to review available information concerning agricultural producer needs in the region, and determine whether additional research was necessary. Four reports are available that provide background information on producer needs.

 Patzek and Rocker’s (2014) work systematically and directly documents impediments to and opportunities for increasing produce sales to institutional markets, but does not integrate data from non-produce farm types.  The Sustainable Thurston (2012) report is a useful documentation of strengths, challenges and opportunities of/for the local food system, but does not systemically integrate direct input from farmers  The Thurston County Working Lands Strategic Plan (2010) is a useful but somewhat dated report.

The findings and recommendations in these reports contribute substantially to understanding agricultural issues in the south Puget Sound. It is intended that information in these reports becomes increasingly useful and applicable by context and updating contributed by this needs assessment.

Please see below for full summaries.

33 | P a g e

South Sound Farms to Market Assessment WSU Thurston County Extension, 2014 Lucas Patzek, PhD – WSU Thurston County Extension Sarah Rocker, MA, MPA – The Evergreen State College

Summary: This report was developed to assess the potential of fruit and vegetable producers from Thurston, Mason and Lewis Counties, in accessing regional retail and institutional buyers, and to explore what infrastructural investments would support this. The authors finalized the project with a business to business event, South Sound Farm-to Fork, aimed at bringing together buyers and producers. 87% of farmers Key Findings: want to sell 75-  Gaps in agricultural infrastructure exist including cold storage limiting farmer access to 100% of their broader markets produce locally  Interest in developing a centralized product aggregation system exists to better meet the order demands from larger buyers. This would be best organized by a third party facilitator to manage the complex logistics involved  Cold storage and food processing should be explored with farmers and economic development partners 1 out of 2 farmers  A disconnect exists between wholesale/institutional buyers and producers. don’t have a Increased efforts should be made to fuse those business relationships; i.e. business business plan forums and outreach/education to buyers

Farmer interest in sharing resources Factors limiting fruit and/or with other farms. (1 not interested to vegetable operations. (1 interested 2 5 very interested) not intersted)

4 3.5 3.5 3 3 2.5 2.5 2 2 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 1 0 0.5 0

34 | P a g e

Local Food Systems Panel White Draft White Paper Sustainable Thurston, 2012

Summary:

This report was compiled as part of a larger sustainability plan for the Thurston County region. Community leaders and individuals involved in food production and distribution were selected to serve on a panel to combine experience with supported research on issues of meeting current food needs in the county. The study includes anticipated needs factoring in forecasted population growth through 2040.

Key findings/recommendations:

 Farmers are challenged by development pressure outside Urban Growth Between 2002 and 2007, Areas, water access, how to meet the demand of population growth, Washington State lost environmental impacts of farming, providing livable wages, and loss of 460,000 acres of farmland urban farm land  Production/capacity analysis to support feeding future populations are needed  Increased shared acquisition of farm land and incentives for using land to farm are recommended  Support in identifying public land that can be used for community food production is sought  Exploration of less land intensive farming practices like aquaculture and Agriculture and the vertical gardening transportation of food  Increased planning for school gardening programs is recommended accounts for about 50% of  Creation of a Working Lands Advocate position is recommended total global greenhouse gas  Authors recommend or the elimination of fees that adversely affect emissions farmers; i.e. like storm water fees

35 | P a g e

Thurston County Working Lands Strategic Plan

Thurston County Agricultural Advisory Committee, 2010

Summary: This Plan complements the Thurston County Comprehensive Plan and the directives of Growth Management legislation. The goal of this plan is to identify the intrinsic value of working lands in Thurston County in order to conserve these lands and maintain forestry and agricultural livelihoods. The content was mostly gathered form suggestions and recommendation shared at focus groups, public meetings and Agriculture Committee meetings.

Key Findings: More than 32,000 acres  Well managed working land supports environmental conservation including of lands were converted preserving habitat for fish and wildlife, supporting aquifer recharge, and into urban lands between combating global climate change 1985 and 2000  The market value of land increases pressure on producers to sell for development creating concern for succession of future farmers Access to water rights is critical factor for the future preservation of working lands. Growing competition between urban water usage and agricultural irrigation needs is a threat  Create a Working Lands Advocate to act as a liaison between producers and decision makers would benefit conservation efforts. In 2007 Thurston  Expanding options to sell development rights without having to sell the entire farms generated property is recommended $117 million in sales  Developing on-going Purchase of Development Rights programs that earmark and (Federal Agriculture seek out new funding streams to purchase rights would support conservation Census)  Authors recommend encouraging The Northwest Agricultural Business center to

offer services in Thurston County; i.e. support with innovative product The largest quantity of development. farms in Thurston  Revision of regulations to create alternative standards for working lands that County are between 1 would continue to protect workers and the public is recommended and 9 acres  Creating mitigation strategies that would require developers to minimalize impact on working lands, or, that would mitigate damages though fees or purchases of other development rights would support conservation

36 | P a g e

Agriculture Infrastructure Study, Pierce County

WSU Pierce County Extension, The Evergreen State College, Pierce County Planning and Land Services ‐ Agriculture Program, Pierce Conservation District and the Pierce County Agriculture Roundtable, 2015

Summary:

This study compiles input from producers and commercial food buyers within Pierce County. The report offers key insights into the successes and challenges that face the local food system as well as recommendations for solutions.

Key Findings/Recommendations

 The majority of farmers utilize word-of-mouth as their main method for marketing. Websites are seen as the most affective online tool  Tractor repair, cold storage, food production facilities and slaughtering/butchering facilities are among some of the infrastructure deficits  Many feel that there are too many farmer’s markets and that the focus should be on making existing markets better as opposed to creating more  Purchasers define “local” with a larger geographical span than producers  Purchasers see pricing as the most important factor in deciding who to buy from  Purchasers seek ease of access in purchasing including simplified ordering that includes online options and produce that is available year-round  Authors recommend conducting a feasibility study on developing a centralized food hub to increase local food sales  Providing marketing/media support to producers and support with technology solutions to business challenges is recommended  Authors recommend streamlining regulations that affect farmers around health, food safety and land use. Support for farmers in better understanding regulations to support ease of compliance is also recommended

To Pierce County purchasers To Pierce County producers,

local means.... local means...... 7% 5% 6%

30% 25% 50% 25% 45% 7% WA - OR - ID WA State Western WA WA - OR - ID WA Puget Sound Puget Sound 51-150 Miles 0-50 Miles

37 | P a g e

Acknowledgements

This report was made possible by agricultural producers who donated time out of busy days to attend listening sessions and share insights and concerns during farm visits. Support with outreach, facilitation, and planning were provided by project partners at the Thurston Economic Development Council, Thurston Conservation District, Lewis County Extension Office, Enterprise for Equity and many others. This report supported by financial sponsorship from the Port of Olympia. Printing services were provided by Olympia Copy and Printing.

Food served at the Listening Sessions was provided by Piece by Piece Farm, Helsing Junction Farm, Hidden River Farms, Johnson Berry Farm, Tunawerth Creamery, and Flying Cow Creamery. Many thanks to Highway 12 Diner in Rochester and Sandstone Café in Tenino for catering services.

WSU Extension programs and policies are consistent with federal and state laws and regulations on nondiscrimination regarding race, sex, religion, age, color, creed, national or ethnic origin; physical, mental, or sensory disability; marital status, sexual orientation, or status as a Vietnam-era or disabled veteran. Evidence of noncompliance may be reported through your local Extension office.

38 | P a g e